Canon EOS R Series Cameras

A_S said:
View attachment 414510

Has anyone experienced this? It’s happened to me 3-4 times now - was very wet this morning but had dried up by about 1pm

This photo was taken at about 4.30…. Was in the car for 40 mins but outside the rest of time tine

Also had an issue of the rear element of my 100-500 constantly condensating in the afternoon to the extent that I had to take the lens off every 2 minutes to let the condensation disipate. No issue with my ef 24-105. Could only think that a.) it didn’t get as wet because I wasn’t using it in the morning and b the distance between the rear element and the warm camera/sensor is greater
Click to expand...

Have had problems with the view finder doing that a fair bit on early morning outings and know its a common problem on the R3 with a fair few sports shooters i know to the point that Rob Gray of Polarity Photo had actually done a survey of R3 owners so as to pass onto Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A_S
Gadget-Guy said:
Have had problems with the view finder doing that a fair bit on early morning outings and know its a common problem on the R3 with a fair few sports shooters i know to the point that Rob Gray of Polarity Photo had actually done a survey of R3 owners so as to pass onto Canon.
Click to expand...
I would be mighty p***ed off if I had this problem after shelling out for an R3!
 
Is this after being subjected to rain; or just in cool conditions?

Touch wood. I’ve never had any fogging up on either my R5 or my partners R7 when being used early mornings for wildlife.

I’ve always had a habit of leaving the bag open slightly when putting it away though. As I learned from that mistake a good few years back when I was over in Sweden coming in from the cold weather :(
 
Last edited:
Gadget-Guy said:
Have had problems with the view finder doing that a fair bit on early morning outings and know its a common problem on the R3 with a fair few sports shooters i know to the point that Rob Gray of Polarity Photo had actually done a survey of R3 owners so as to pass onto Canon.
Click to expand...
Can't say i have tbh, but I guess I haven't really used it in such different temperatures. I have had the fog up of the lens a few times mind you
 
Wellsyboy said:
I would be mighty p***ed off if I had this problem after shelling out for an R3!
Click to expand...

Both my ones do it due to the heat the EVF produces i think as my 1DX MKII is fine but then again my previous Fuji and Sony mirrorless cameras with EVF's didnt.

James Thomas 75 said:
Is this after being subjected to rain; or just in cool conditions?

Touch wood. I’ve never had any fogging up on either my R5 or my partners R7 when being used early mornings for wildlife.

I’ve always had a habit of leaving the bag open slightly when putting it away though. As I learned from that mistake a good few years back when I was over in Sweden coming in from the cold weather :(
Click to expand...

Mine is just cool early mornings and mainly after using the EVF for a while as it seems to heat up, have noticed also that i get a similar moisture build up if i turn the screen around to view when doing video between the back of screen and body.

stickytape said:
Can't say i have tbh, but I guess I haven't really used it in such different temperatures. I have had the fog up of the lens a few times mind you
Click to expand...

Didnt have a problem all race season to be honest just recently when out walking the dog in the early cold winter mornings.
The EVF heats the chamber up and causes condensation, search for R3 view finder misting and there are a fair few reports of it happening along with rear elements of lenses doing the same. Does seem strange as i also had an R6 and never had a problem with that.
 
Last edited:
to answer the question it was p***ing wet! very wet, but I did have the camera covered with a microfibre cloth - although should have used something more water resistant i guess. To highlight the point you can see the rain prominantly in every picture:

5G4A3301.jpg5G4A3362.jpg
 
A_S said:
to answer the question it was p***ing wet! very wet, but I did have the camera covered with a microfibre cloth - although should have used something more water resistant i guess. To highlight the point you can see the rain prominantly in every picture:

View attachment 414760View attachment 414761
Click to expand...

Right. That may well be why I haven’t had the problem (yet) during my early mornings then. As I’ve got ours set to the 30 sec shut down to save power (although my R5 has always taken closer to 90 for some reason…) . So the EVF obviously doesn’t heat up as much in the cold.

Besides 2 years ago at Goodwood; I haven’t shot any motorsport since having the R cameras either. I need to put pay to that…

Think my previous post mentioning Sweden would’ve probably been the last time I did.
The 7D I was using at the time really didn’t like me taking it straight indoors after being out in -20 odd.
It definitely taught me the lesson for the future :D
 
Last edited:
you have con
LongLensPhotography said:
petapixel.com

Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8 L Z Review: The Best Do-It-All Lens

We've seen 24-105mm lens formulas before, and we have seen f/2.8 zooms too. However, we have never seen the two combined and it's about time.
petapixel.com petapixel.com

"Smeary corners"

"For event and wedding photographers"

Ouch
Click to expand...

you have conviniently just picked out specific words.... completely ignoring the positive aspects of the review

"This happens at either end of the lens range and in most photos will honestly be a non-issue" RE the "smeary corners"

or

"Regardless, we have a lens that hasn’t been made before and Canon did a great job"

And most importantly

"Yes. If you are a working professional or hybrid photo and video shooter who needs speed and versatility, you have an expensive but functional answer to your problems."
 
A_S said:
you have con


you have conviniently just picked out specific words.... completely ignoring the positive aspects of the review

"This happens at either end of the lens range and in most photos will honestly be a non-issue" RE the "smeary corners"

or

"Regardless, we have a lens that hasn’t been made before and Canon did a great job"

And most importantly

"Yes. If you are a working professional or hybrid photo and video shooter who needs speed and versatility, you have an expensive but functional answer to your problems."
Click to expand...
As a paid advertorial they are supposed to say very nice things.. or nothing about the matter at all. What slipped through the cracks is much more than the usual and should be therefore highly concerning if you are going to drop £3.5k for one.

I have no doubt this will still work great for people who want versatility in one package such event and video shooters, who also have typically no high expectations or demand of good performance in the periphery.

Things supposedly improve at 60mm, but if that is what you get why not just buy a 50mm f/1.2 prime instead?! 24mm = no good; 105mm = no good. That is a huge huge huge problem and cameras like R5 really magnify it these days. They can no longer get away with just OK performance for 1Dx and R3 resolution cameras; obviously the 4K video bar is still pretty low considering. So yes if I shot mainly video or only did weddings I would consider one.

Flare was also flagged as potential problem, and early versions should be avoided at all costs if shopping on sites like ebay.

Wouldn't it be great if canon finally designed a zoom or two that focus on resolution and raw optical performance, and while they are at it also release some reasonably priced and well build f/1.4 primes. I will be sure to tell it loud and clear to their faces at TPS
 
A_S said:
you have con


you have conviniently just picked out specific words.... completely ignoring the positive aspects of the review

"This happens at either end of the lens range and in most photos will honestly be a non-issue" RE the "smeary corners"

or

"Regardless, we have a lens that hasn’t been made before and Canon did a great job"

And most importantly

"Yes. If you are a working professional or hybrid photo and video shooter who needs speed and versatility, you have an expensive but functional answer to your problems."
Click to expand...

LongLensPhotography said:
As a paid advertorial they are supposed to say very nice things.. or nothing about the matter at all. What slipped through the cracks is much more than the usual and should be therefore highly concerning if you are going to drop £3.5k for one.

I have no doubt this will still work great for people who want versatility in one package such event and video shooters, who also have typically no high expectations or demand of good performance in the periphery.

Things supposedly improve at 60mm, but if that is what you get why not just buy a 50mm f/1.2 prime instead?! 24mm = no good; 105mm = no good. That is a huge huge huge problem and cameras like R5 really magnify it these days. They can no longer get away with just OK performance for 1Dx and R3 resolution cameras; obviously the 4K video bar is still pretty low considering. So yes if I shot mainly video or only did weddings I would consider one.

Flare was also flagged as potential problem, and early versions should be avoided at all costs if shopping on sites like ebay.

Wouldn't it be great if canon finally designed a zoom or two that focus on resolution and raw optical performance, and while they are at it also release some reasonably priced and well build f/1.4 primes. I will be sure to tell it loud and clear to their faces at TPS
Click to expand...

to be honest if I was paying £3.5 K for a lens I would expect it to be absolutely sharp with no optical issues, for me anyway that’s a lot of money
 
To an extent I agree with the above - the point being its a catch all lens.

Would I buy it for Astro photography - no

would I buy it for sports and events - yes

Is it giving me more flexibility in those circumstances than say a 2.5k 24-70 2.8 - Yes

so this is the purpose it serves and probably the business case canon built it on. They probably set out with the aim to design something that worked for event/sports/street/video that had flexibility at F2.8 - that was the mission statement and it acheives that. I doubt they started out with the aim to produce the perfect lens for product, architecture, macro or astro.... hence why it doesn't serve those purposes as well i.e pixel peeping across the frame sharpness etc.
 
As someone with arthritis in his hands, the main reason I have always avoided Nikon ( even when they were streaking ahead and Canon was in the doldrums - was the weight which undoubtedly goes with increased "build quality" whatever it may mean to anyone.

I don't tend to fuss over or mollycoddle my cameras, though i do worry about heavy rain. Having said that, I did have an unpleasant experience in Norwich Cathedral last summer when I put my R5 and 24-105 f4L on a seat beside me not realising it was sloped and only noticed my kit had slipped off when I heard it bang onto the stone floor! with a resounding crash!! AFAIK nothing was damaged :oops: :$:oops: :$
 
Unfortunately my R5 has to go back for repair, luckily I bought it from Panamoz so it has a 3 year warranty, have about 5 months left to run
its locking up again even after updating to the latest firmware and using different memory cards, there must be something not right
I’ve emailed Panamoz should be all sorted they have a good reputation
 
OK, I've some cash to spend on a standard zoom.

In all my years I could never justify a std L zoom, when shooting weddings I preferred fast primes.

So the choice seems to be between the 24-105 f4 and the 24-70 2.8 (not interested in the consumer zooms and really dont want to stretch to the 24-105 f2.8 or the 28-70 f2.

The longer lens doesn't get stellar reviews, but can someone convince me its better than it appears?

I'm likely to have a try of them all at the photography show, but wanted to get some advice from the nice folks here.

The other option is to buy an EF, but they don't balance so well
 
Phil V said:
OK, I've some cash to spend on a standard zoom.

In all my years I could never justify a std L zoom, when shooting weddings I preferred fast primes.

So the choice seems to be between the 24-105 f4 and the 24-70 2.8 (not interested in the consumer zooms and really dont want to stretch to the 24-105 f2.8 or the 28-70 f2.

The longer lens doesn't get stellar reviews, but can someone convince me its better than it appears?

I'm likely to have a try of them all at the photography show, but wanted to get some advice from the nice folks here.

The other option is to buy an EF, but they don't balance so well
Click to expand...

Probably not what you wanna hear, Phil.. :D
But if I were you; I’d honestly give all 4 a go at the show and make your mind up that way.

Having had the 28-70 until early December last year. I can vouch for it being an absolute beauty of a lens. And really should be considered (if means permit of course!)

Not the lightest as I’m sure you already know. And definitely helps having the grip on smaller bodies like the R5 / 6 to balance the overhang out somewhat.
 
Phil V said:
OK, I've some cash to spend on a standard zoom.

In all my years I could never justify a std L zoom, when shooting weddings I preferred fast primes.

So the choice seems to be between the 24-105 f4 and the 24-70 2.8 (not interested in the consumer zooms and really dont want to stretch to the 24-105 f2.8 or the 28-70 f2.

The longer lens doesn't get stellar reviews, but can someone convince me its better than it appears?

I'm likely to have a try of them all at the photography show, but wanted to get some advice from the nice folks here.

The other option is to buy an EF, but they don't balance so well
Click to expand...
Don't waste your money on any of them. If you only do portraits maybe they are not so bad but expect crazy vignetting with RF 24-70. That's honestly the one I'm least likely to buy even when it drops below £500 which will happen the next day they release ii version
 
Canon Cashback

I appreciate that is old news for the regulars here but I was pleased to receive a modest £20 back from Canon on my RF 50mm. The offer continues to August this year which means I can aim for a RF 100-400mm for my Birthday in a couple of months and perhaps one other treat before the end of Summer.

In case anyone is wondering, it took about 4-6 weeks in my case (can't recall exactly when I registered) but when I queried Canon as to whether it was going through, they were very prompt and courteous with their response.
 
PeteSpringfield said:
Canon Cashback

I appreciate that is old news for the regulars here but I was pleased to receive a modest £20 back from Canon on my RF 50mm. The offer continues to August this year which means I can aim for a RF 100-400mm for my Birthday in a couple of months and perhaps one other treat before the end of Summer.

In case anyone is wondering, it took about 4-6 weeks in my case (can't recall exactly when I registered) but when I queried Canon as to whether it was going through, they were very prompt and courteous with their response.
Click to expand...

Still waiting on mine funnily enough for the RF 1.4 extender I bought over Xmas.
Was supposed to be on the 23rd (last Friday) but nothing as yet.
 
just heard back from Canon about my R5 that has issues with lockup that I sent to their Elstree repair place, they are going to replace the main board on it , it’s still under warranty with Panamoz so will get a refund from them for the cost
 
LCPete said:
just heard back from Canon about my R5 that has issues with lockup that I sent to their Elstree repair place, they are going to replace the main board on it , it’s still under warranty with Panamoz so will get a refund from them for the cost
Click to expand...
just received refund from panamoz for the repair, really quick service , no wonder they have a good reputation
 
LCPete said:
just heard back from Canon about my R5 that has issues with lockup that I sent to their Elstree repair place, they are going to replace the main board on it , it’s still under warranty with Panamoz so will get a refund from them for the cost
Click to expand...
Just shows you why you need to buy from. Panamoz with 3yr warranty Vs overpriced UK only 1 year. Particularly when you are buying canon
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Just shows you why you need to buy from. Panamoz with 3yr warranty Vs overpriced UK only 1 year. Particularly when you are buying canon
Click to expand...

yes to be honest if I had bought an official UK import it would be out of warranty now
it is the first Canon camera that I have had that’s gone wrong though and I do give them a lot of use
 
Good point about Wex 2 year warranty in my case my R5 has needed repair after 2 and a half years so it was lucky that I bought it from Panamoz
 
OK, I am properly flabbergasted by the performance of the R6. We've kept chickens for many years and as we're getting too old to keep them now we're running the flock down. I've been trying to take pictures of them over the last 15 years or so and probably my best efforts were with the Canon EOS-1v and the 100mm EF Macro. Yep. Film got me better results. Obviously the issue with chickens is keeping them anywhere near the viewfinder long enough for AF to actually get good focus. So I took a chair into the coop, sat down with a brew, and tried the "Animal Eye" AF setting. Good lord. This was at 2.8.


Animal AF Test by Ian, on Flickr

Obviously not all my photos were like this, but at least 30% were which was a massive improvement on previous outings and enough of a positive step to get me to try more.
This is the crop, which is nowhere near as huge as I needed it to be... I'm not sure I'll ever need another camera. (This isn't a promise, obviously!)

Screenshot 2024-03-11 173250.png
 
Tysonator said:
I know, there is always the Canon Test Drive
Click to expand...

I had no idea Canon did this too - I recently bought the R8 (comes on Wednesday) but I've spent the past week debating if I should've gotten a used R6 instead, but maybe I'll test an R6 side by side and see if I notice anything
 
Phil V said:
I did, I looked at the 24-105's, and the 28-70.

And thankfully it justified the decision I'd already made to buy the 24-70. the 24-105 2.8 and the 28-70 are massive
Click to expand...

Phil, how does 24-70 RF compare to the EF version? I'm yet to buy an RF lens, maybe this will be the first.
 
TimHughes said:
Phil, how does 24-70 RF compare to the EF version? I'm yet to buy an RF lens, maybe this will be the first.
Click to expand...
Funny tale:
I never owned the EF version.

When I shot crop I had the 17-55 2.8 and by the time I moved to FF I preferred shooting primes. And I paired the 35 Art and 135L as a wedding pair.

Nic had the 24-70 sigma, which I never liked.

And as I’ve tried to downsize for a travel photography kit I decided that a std zoom was something I ought to have a go at.

So the travel bag contains the following RF:
Bargain 16mm 2.8
24-70 2.8
50mm 1.8
85mm f2
All in a tiny Mindshift 10L sling.

And I’m even considering getting rid of the 35mm Art; as much as I love it, I haven’t used it for yonks.

Definitely keeping the 135 f2 and 70-200 2.8 too.
 
Phil V said:
Funny tale:
I never owned the EF version.

When I shot crop I had the 17-55 2.8 and by the time I moved to FF I preferred shooting primes. And I paired the 35 Art and 135L as a wedding pair.

Nic had the 24-70 sigma, which I never liked.

And as I’ve tried to downsize for a travel photography kit I decided that a std zoom was something I ought to have a go at.

So the travel bag contains the following RF:
Bargain 16mm 2.8
24-70 2.8
50mm 1.8
85mm f2
All in a tiny Mindshift 10L sling.

And I’m even considering getting rid of the 35mm Art; as much as I love it, I haven’t used it for yonks.

Definitely keeping the 135 f2 and 70-200 2.8 too.
Click to expand...
Thanks Phil, much appreciated.
For events I prefer primes too, so they are getting the most use 24 1.4 M2, 35 1.4 M2, sigma 50 1.4 art, 85 1.4, 135 2.0, 200 2.0 or longer if needed
The zooms are very useful, 11-24 4-0, 16-35 2.8 M3, 24-70 M2, 70-200 M2, 200-400 4.0
So far, no compelling reason to switch to RF. I did try the 28-70 2.0 but it's very heavy and pricy.
 
TimHughes said:
Thanks Phil, much appreciated.
For events I prefer primes too, so they are getting the most use 24 1.4 M2, 35 1.4 M2, sigma 50 1.4 art, 85 1.4, 135 2.0, 200 2.0 or longer if needed
The zooms are very useful, 11-24 4-0, 16-35 2.8 M3, 24-70 M2, 70-200 M2, 200-400 4.0
So far, no compelling reason to switch to RF. I did try the 28-70 2.0 but it's very heavy and pricy.
Click to expand...
I shot an awards do on Friday night using only the 24-70.

Surprisingly I think I could work with it.
I think I’d still like something longer and there’s the option of wider apertures. But I may have found a single lens solution for 80% of my images.
 
I've just had my bonus paid and I am still un decided between 2/3 lenses

1.) 24-70 2.8 RF
2.) 24-105 2.8 RF
3.) 70-200 2.8 RF

I really want to go with the 24-105 but its just so big and as I treck through forests often quite a way with remote cameras and a heavy bag i am not sure if i want the lightness and convineince of the 24-70 or the extra reach of the 105....

Baring in mind my current portfolio of lenses being

Laowa 12mm, EF16-35 2.8, EF 24-105 f4, EF 70-200 F4, EF 300 F4, 100-500 RF......

So everything covered - its more about moving some of those to 2.8 and replacing the older stuff which is 15-20 years old - but still does a great job
 
What sort of photos do you want to take? Which of you current lenses ever disappoints? Bonus question - is there Anything else with more “bang for the buck” to put the bonus towards? ;) I’m thinking maybe a prime, but depends what you want to achieve.

Not sure if you saw, I recently started a thread to discuss how much of an upgrade RF versions are to good EF lenses.
 
TimHughes said:
What sort of photos do you want to take? Which of you current lenses ever disappoints? Bonus question - is there Anything else with more “bang for the buck” to put the bonus towards? ;) I’m thinking maybe a prime, but depends what you want to achieve.

Not sure if you saw, I recently started a thread to discuss how much of an upgrade RF versions are to good EF lenses.
Click to expand...

I hadn't spotted that. Thanks

Couple of conciderations

I was hoping for it to be both

A.) a walk around lens hence the 24-70 suits
B.) useful for my rallying stuff - panning slow shutter, inside bends, start/finish (often low light evening for those 2)/service park hence why the extra 35mm and f2.8 of the 24-105 is useful.
C.) RF version prefered as i love the fact I can do pans at 1/20s and I presume the reason being the IS helps that - so wanted to avoid the 24-70 EF w/o IS
D.) astro -> not seen much evedence that either would suit this TBH so wrote that off and will keep using my Laowa 12mm 2.8.
 
A_S said:
I hadn't spotted that. Thanks

Couple of conciderations

I was hoping for it to be both

A.) a walk around lens hence the 24-70 suits
B.) useful for my rallying stuff - panning slow shutter, inside bends, start/finish (often low light evening for those 2)/service park hence why the extra 35mm and f2.8 of the 24-105 is useful.
C.) RF version prefered as i love the fact I can do pans at 1/20s and I presume the reason being the IS helps that - so wanted to avoid the 24-70 EF w/o IS
D.) astro -> not seen much evedence that either would suit this TBH so wrote that off and will keep using my Laowa 12mm 2.8.
Click to expand...
The 24-70 and 16mm 2.8 come in at under £2k grey market :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top